> On 22 Jun 2018, at 14:27, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> What would that be good for concerning this issue?
Only you know that: you did not like the explicit constructor for some reason,
but didn't detail.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-dev
Hans Åberg writes:
>> On 22 Jun 2018, at 11:09, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Hans Åberg writes:
>>
You could also do it as a constructor, if you prefer its syntax and
don't mind implementing yet another one:
explicit Transform(const Transform *t) ...
>>>
>>> One can also
> On 22 Jun 2018, at 11:09, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Hans Åberg writes:
>
>>> You could also do it as a constructor, if you prefer its syntax and
>>> don't mind implementing yet another one:
>>>
>>> explicit Transform(const Transform *t) ...
>>
>> One can also use a tag type argument in th
Hans Åberg writes:
>> On 21 Jun 2018, at 00:30, nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Maybe a function would help:
>>
>>Transform make_transform(const Transform *t)
>> {
>>return t ? Transform (*t) : Transform ();
>> }
>>
>> You could also do it as a constructor, if
> On 21 Jun 2018, at 00:30, nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maybe a function would help:
>
>Transform make_transform(const Transform *t)
> {
>return t ? Transform (*t) : Transform ();
> }
>
> You could also do it as a constructor, if you prefer its syntax and
> d
On 2018/06/21 12:07:01, dak wrote:
Rework according to Dan's review
Noticeably improved. I do prefer the function to the constructor.
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu
Hans Åberg writes:
>> On 21 Jun 2018, at 10:48, d...@gnu.org wrote:
>>
>> I think C++19(?) or so already states that returned classes
>> are to be considered initializers rather than temporaries.
>
> Perhaps this is what you have in mind: C+17 returns prvalues without
> creating temporaries; [1]
> On 21 Jun 2018, at 10:48, d...@gnu.org wrote:
>
> I think C++19(?) or so already states that returned classes
> are to be considered initializers rather than temporaries.
Perhaps this is what you have in mind: C+17 returns prvalues without creating
temporaries; [1], first note.
1. https://e
On 2018/06/21 08:48:32, dak wrote:
A constructor/function from Transform * seems like a side track when
the only
use case is conversion from SCM. A constructor avoids an extra copy
(but I
think C++19(?) or so already states that returned classes are to be
considered
initializers rather th
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/40001/lily/include/transform.hh
File lily/include/transform.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/40001/lily/include/transform.hh#newcode52
lily/include/transform.hh:52: Transform (Offset p0)
On 2018/06/20 22:30:07, Dan Eble wrot
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/40001/lily/include/transform.hh
File lily/include/transform.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/40001/lily/include/transform.hh#newcode52
lily/include/transform.hh:52: Transform (Offset p0)
Do you want to allow implicit convers
On 2018/06/17 10:54:38, dak wrote:
Right. I haven't rebased this patch yet, but I naturally will have to
load up
another version for review now that the fix is in master.
I actually lean towards doing this in a manner similar to your original
approach, namely just using the stencil rotation
Reviewers: Be-3,
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/1/lily/stencil-integral.cc
File lily/stencil-integral.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/1/lily/stencil-integral.cc#newcode1099
lily/stencil-integral.cc:1099: Offset center (robust_scm2double
(scm_cadr (rot),
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/1/lily/stencil-integral.cc
File lily/stencil-integral.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/344970043/diff/1/lily/stencil-integral.cc#newcode1099
lily/stencil-integral.cc:1099: Offset center (robust_scm2double
(scm_cadr (rot), 0.0), robust_scm2
14 matches
Mail list logo
